Understanding Novice Users' Mental Models of Gesture Discoverability and Designing Effective Onboarding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A variety of consumer Augmented Reality (AR) applications have been released on mobile devices and novel immersive headsets over the last five years, creating a breadth of new AR-enabled experiences. However, these applications, particularly those designed for immersive headsets, require users to employ unfamiliar gestural input and adopt novel interaction paradigms. This leap forward intensifies the complexity of help-seeking and onboarding needs for the end-users. Recent emergence of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered in-context help tools has become potential alternatives to onboarding and search methods. However, non-technical users struggle with prompt-based interactions within LLMs that offer human-like language capabilities, which is unique, but can also be unreliable. My doctoral research aims to (1) understand how novice users discover gestural interactions and classify the types of interaction challenges they face; (2) investigate the nuances in users? mental models of emerging technologies, such as LLMs and AR; and, (3) explore the design of onboarding that enhances gesture discoverability and their application within the AR environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".